06-30-2021, 02:48 PM
|
#341
|
Loves Teh Chat!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muta
I don't understand - is O'Toole indirectly suggesting that COVID originated out of Canada now? What the f*** was the point on this video? Seems to use a lot of time and words to explain a whole lot of... nothing, really.
|
I believe the point is "Trudeau bad and scary, vote for me!"
|
|
|
06-30-2021, 03:50 PM
|
#342
|
wins 10 internets
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: slightly to the left
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torture
I believe the point is "Trudeau bad and scary, vote for me!"
|
It's hard to think that the cons actually believe they can win the next election with their current Trump-lite approach. If I was a conspiracy believer I would almost think their real goal is to keep Trudeau in power as long as possible, because their tactics are going to accomplish just that
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Hemi-Cuda For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-30-2021, 04:06 PM
|
#343
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary - Centre West
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudoreality
The title of this thread still really bugs me. It is not as bad as before, but the origins of coronaviruses is not what is being discussed, but rather the originals of SARS-CoV-2 specifically.
|
THE Coronavirus, as in the one we are all talking about.
It's the same way that there are many dudes, but only one gets 'The' in front.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
|
|
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-30-2021, 04:35 PM
|
#344
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TorqueDog
THE Coronavirus, as in the one we are all talking about.
It's the same way that there are many dudes, but only one gets 'The' in front.
|
That's what they said about "The" World War or "The" Great War. Or in this case, it is like calling F7 "the" Fast and Furious Movie.
|
|
|
07-01-2021, 11:14 AM
|
#345
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary - Centre West
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudoreality
Or in this case, it is like calling F7 "the" Fast and Furious Movie.
|
I think you could be forgiven for talking about "the Fast and Furious Movie" in the context of "the Fast and Furious Movie that has somehow killed the equivalent of the population of Los Angeles worldwide".
Everybody knows you aren't talkin' Tokyo Drift.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
|
|
|
11-07-2021, 07:49 PM
|
#346
|
Franchise Player
|
Chinese government is despicable.
Journalist who reported on Wuhan near death in Chinese prison.
https://apple.news/Az4-_HaYAS6-dweVZnw0lCg
How anyone can have anything to do with that country is beyond imagination.
Damn Trudeau have some balls and boycott their Olympics.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Manhattanboy For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-10-2022, 02:33 AM
|
#348
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary, Canada
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDutch
|
The truth of the matter is that a whole host of people who are suppose to know, who's job it is to protect us and a lot more people in charge knew a lot more than they let on.
Plenty of evidence from the start that lot's of things about Covid were not what people were letting on. From a potential lab leak, to the potential and probable aspect of it being airborne to more.
I see the same thing happening with our financial sector these days. We are past the point of no return in a lot of ways with what is happening and how far we have gone.
The people who's sole job it is to protect and regulate and spot the dangers aren't in the position to protect us. It's scary
|
|
|
06-10-2022, 08:24 AM
|
#349
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: California
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDutch
|
That article does not say probably, it’s saying possibly.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-12-2022, 03:12 AM
|
#350
|
Franchise Player
|
The WHO, that is the World Health Organization, created and funded to protect the “World”from just this very thing, is a puppet of the Chinese government and an epic failure.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Manhattanboy For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-12-2022, 03:48 PM
|
#351
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North of the River, South of the Bluff
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
That article does not say probably, it’s saying possibly.
|
The “maybe probably” was my tongue in cheek way of saying it has legs, and likely more that anyone cares to admit publicly.
The COVID came from US mail China has been pushing has gone nowhere. Rightfully so as it was and is a full crock.
However If there wasn’t much hanging around the trail would have gone cold here too, but this is feeling more and more like there is serious smoke, and China is going to cover it up until the coast is clear.
Honestly is what it is. If China doesn’t want transparency fine, but its court of opinion as the alternative.
|
|
|
06-16-2022, 03:49 AM
|
#352
|
Franchise Player
|
So after testing over 100,000 bats plus other animals in China and not one positive result for COVID 19 but we're supposed to believe that's where it came from, lets don't talk about the first cases were in Wuhan that's a 1000 miles away from these nasty bats that shut down the world for 2 years, lets don't talk about that government controlled virology lab in Wuhan that studies coronaviruses!
Sure China sure
|
|
|
06-16-2022, 06:42 PM
|
#353
|
Franchise Player
|
nm
|
|
|
07-27-2022, 01:24 PM
|
#354
|
Franchise Player
|
There was an interesting study released yesterday on the genetic diversity of the earliest coronavirus cases. Based on the evidence in the paper, it's unlikely that the earliest SARS-CoV-2 infections in humans came from a single source (as you'd expect with a lab leak). There were two distinct lineages in the samples taken in the first couple of weeks of the pandemic with mutations that would have been unlikely to have occurred in humans in such a short period of time. So based on that, the authors suggest that the most plausible explanation is that the virus was circulating in animals long enough to produce the mutations, and then there were multiple independent zoonotic introductions in Wuhan, two of which were successful (for lack of a better word) at producing spread within humans.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp8337
Also of note, at least one of the co-authors of the paper had in the past publicly called for an open and independent investigation into the origin of SARS-CoV-2 and said we cannot dismiss the lab leak hypothesis. So this likely isn't a case of scientists trying to find evidence to support a preferred conclusion.
|
|
|
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to opendoor For This Useful Post:
|
activeStick,
belsarius,
Bill Bumface,
Finger Cookin,
Fuzz,
GreenLantern2814,
InglewoodFan,
JohnnyB,
kirant,
photon,
psyang,
ripTDR,
Sr. Mints,
SutterBrother
|
07-30-2022, 10:28 AM
|
#355
|
Crash and Bang Winger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
That article does not say probably, it’s saying possibly.
|
It is still a full 180 on their original position as science keeps causing problems for them
|
|
|
07-30-2022, 10:34 AM
|
#356
|
Crash and Bang Winger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor
There was an interesting study released yesterday on the genetic diversity of the earliest coronavirus cases. Based on the evidence in the paper, it's unlikely that the earliest SARS-CoV-2 infections in humans came from a single source (as you'd expect with a lab leak). There were two distinct lineages in the samples taken in the first couple of weeks of the pandemic with mutations that would have been unlikely to have occurred in humans in such a short period of time. So based on that, the authors suggest that the most plausible explanation is that the virus was circulating in animals long enough to produce the mutations, and then there were multiple independent zoonotic introductions in Wuhan, two of which were successful (for lack of a better word) at producing spread within humans.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp8337
Also of note, at least one of the co-authors of the paper had in the past publicly called for an open and independent investigation into the origin of SARS-CoV-2 and said we cannot dismiss the lab leak hypothesis. So this likely isn't a case of scientists trying to find evidence to support a preferred conclusion.
|
However, it doesn't take much to conclude that the Virus originating separately in two places and then emerging at the same time is basically impossible. The study is actually stating that both lineages have a common origin.
So, to clarify, the study is in fact clearly saying that there was a single source.
The notion that the virus passed through animals is not inconsistent with lab theories. One of many examples:
https://www.science.org/content/arti...de-mice-sicker
Last edited by jjgallow; 07-30-2022 at 11:19 AM.
Reason: Na
|
|
|
07-30-2022, 12:18 PM
|
#357
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjgallow
However, it doesn't take much to conclude that the Virus originating separately in two places and then emerging at the same time is basically impossible. The study is actually stating that both lineages have a common origin.
So, to clarify, the study is in fact clearly saying that there was a single source.
|
Obviously they both have a common origin. But they're different enough from one another that the chance of the mutations happening in the period of a couple of weeks with a few dozen infections in humans is extremely low. Which means there likely would have been enough spread among animals to generate the two mutations and then the different lineages were transmitted to humans (at least) two separate times from animals. That's inconsistent with a lab leak hypothesis, where a single variant would have come out of the lab into humans.
Further bolstering the theory that both lineages came from animals separately is the fact that:
a) both lineages were found at the wet market,
b) lineage A is more closely related to bat coronaviruses than lineage B (and is thus likely the older of the two lineages). But lineage A was found in later infections than lineage B, which is the opposite of what you'd expect if the mutations happened in humans.
Taken together, that would imply that both lineages existed in animals before being transmitted to humans.
Can you come up with a plausible scenario where two different versions of the same virus would escape from a lab separately? I mean, I guess it's theoretically possible (e.g. there were multiple breaches in a BSL-4 lab, it came out of the lab into animals where it mutated before coming back into humans, animals from the lab were sold to wet markets, etc.) but it makes the hypothesis a lot less likely.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to opendoor For This Useful Post:
|
|
07-30-2022, 02:24 PM
|
#358
|
Crash and Bang Winger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor
Can you come up with a plausible scenario where two different versions of the same virus would escape from a lab separately? I mean, I guess it's theoretically possible (e.g. there were multiple breaches in a BSL-4 lab, it came out of the lab into animals where it mutated before coming back into humans, animals from the lab were sold to wet markets, etc.) but it makes the hypothesis a lot less likely.
|
We're talking about one of the most contagious multi-species viruses ever, so, yes, but, also not needed.
I would assume most likey that there was one initial escape from the lab. Now, we're giving the lab possibly more credit than they deserve in assuming that.
What happens after that, however, is inherently random and we can actually expect to see multiple transmission paths and lineages.
All the humans who worked at the lab also had close contact with mice, bats, etc. As did surrounding residents with at least mice.
So it could have gone:
Human->mouse->human->bat->mouse->Human
Bat->human->mouse->bat->human
Mouse->human-farm animal->mouse->bat->farm animal at the market->human
Or about 10000 other combinations.
None of which rule out the lab in any way or explain away the clear splices seen in the virus .
I honestly never heard of a human-only theory. I believe you that there surely was one but can't have been well thought out.
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4374287
https://www.propublica.org/article/h...-coronaviruses
Last edited by jjgallow; 07-30-2022 at 02:44 PM.
|
|
|
07-30-2022, 03:23 PM
|
#359
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Aside from the intellectual curiosity, what value can be assigned to knowing if the was lab leaked overall?
I don't think the knowledge would have any tangible effect on the world. There are people who have far better experience and information in the area them me, who will write the history books. The seen to be leaning that this was not lab leaked right now, so I lean that way. If they change they're minds I will listen to the new and old explanations and will probably follow them to their new conclusion
|
|
|
07-30-2022, 03:23 PM
|
#360
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjgallow
We're talking about one of the most contagious multi-species viruses ever, so, yes, but, also not needed.
I would assume most likey that there was one initial escape from the lab. Now, we're giving the lab possibly more credit than they deserve in assuming that.
What happens after that, however, is inherently random and we can actually expect to see multiple transmission paths and lineages.
All the humans who worked at the lab also had close contact with mice, bats, etc. As did surrounding residents with at least mice.
So it could have gone:
Human->mouse->human->bat->mouse->Human
Bat->human->mouse->bat->human
Mouse->human-farm animal->mouse->bat->farm animal at the market->human
Or about 10000 other combinations.
None of which rule out the lab in any way or explain away the clear splices seen in the virus .
|
So on the one hand it's one of the most contagious multi-species viruses ever in existence. But at the same time you think it transmitted undetected in humans long enough to go to and from a bunch of animal reservoirs, remained transmitting in the animal populations long enough to develop the different lineages (without infecting basically any humans), and then jumped back into humans where it took off quickly. That doesn't seem very plausible given the growth rates we've seen in immunologically naive human populations.
And it's also at odds with basically every lab leak hypothesis I've seen. The primary foundation of most of the lab leak hypotheses is that there is zero evidence (or even plausibility) that SARS-CoV-2 spread in humans undetected for a period of time. Their whole argument is that it came out of nowhere via a lab leak, which is why it went from nothing to a pandemic in a few weeks. That doesn't really fit with the idea that it spread around in humans and animals around Wuhan long enough to generate the genetic diversity that existed.
Quote:
I honestly never heard of a human-only theory. I believe you that there surely was one but can't have been well thought out.
|
That's basically the only legitimate and plausible theory of the lab leak. The theory is that a worker (or workers) at the lab unknowingly became infected with a coronavirus they were working on and/or that animals in the lab had been infected with. Some posit that it was a virus that an animal came into the lab infected with (the same idea as the bat virus that killed those miners in 2012), while others suggest that it was the result of gain of function research. Either way, the worker(s) would have then spread it outside the lab and it took off quickly from there.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:01 PM.
|
|